Slashdot Mirror
Man Accused of Trying To Sell Kids On Craigslist
crimeandpunishment writes "You can get a lot of good deals on Craigslist, apparently including children. A New York State man has been arrested for allegedly trying to sell his children on the online marketplace. From the article: 'State Police Investigator Bryan Blum said Joshua A. Stagnitto, 24, was charged with one count of third-degree falsely reporting an incident, a misdemeanor, after a report was made to Monroe County Child Protective Services advising them of the posting on the online marketplace. The posting indicated a person was selling their children. Police said an investigation revealed Stagnitto was the source of the posting.'"
Oh dang, the punchline is the title... What do I put in the body?
Mr Stagnitto claims to have a Slashdot UID in the low 5 digits.
You are welcome on my lawn.
No Refunds
Freecycle.org would have been better.
"Common sense will be the death of us all"
Am I the only one that notices that the summary contradicts the title? Title says he was arrested for selling his kids, summary says he made a fake posting for selling his kids and prank called the police about it. WTF samzenpus, more sloshed than usual today?
What is the difference between adoption and selling children?
The charge doesn't make sense to me. I read the article, and I don't understand what the charge means. I would think that "falsely reporting an incident" would be something like calling 911 when you don't have an emergency. Or perhaps it would be reporting to police that you were mugged by someone, when you were not actually mugged at all. He made a joke post on craiglist about selling his kids, and he gets hit with a charge of "falsely reporting an incident?"
N.Y.S. Penal Code
240.50 Falsely reporting an incident in the third degree.
A person is guilty of falsely reporting an incident in the third degree when, knowing the information reported, conveyed or circulated to be false or baseless, he:
1. Initiates or circulates a false report or warning of an alleged occurrence or impending occurrence of a crime, catastrophe or emergency under circumstances in which it is not unlikely that public alarm or inconvenience will result; or
2. Reports, by word or action, to an official or quasi-official agency or organization having the function of dealing with emergencies involving danger to life or property, an alleged occurrence or impending occurrence of a catastrophe or emergency which did not in fact occur or does not in fact exist; or
3. Gratuitously reports to a law enforcement officer or agency (a) the alleged occurrence of an offense or incident which did not in fact occur; or (b) an allegedly impending occurrence of an offense or incident which in fact is not about to occur; or (c) false information relating to an actual offense or incident or to the alleged implication of some person therein; or
4. Reports, by word or action, to the statewide central register of child abuse and maltreatment, as defined in title six of article six of the social services law, an alleged occurrence or condition of child abuse or maltreatment which did not in fact occur or exist.
Falsely reporting an incident in the third degree is a class A misdemeanor.
I guess they'll attempt to prove that he "[i]nitiate[d] or circulate[d] a false report or warning of an...impending occurrence of a crime...under circumstances in which it is not unlikely that public...inconvenience will result." Or they would if he doesn't plea bargain. This law seems to have awfully wide applicability.
Back when my mother was a kid in the 1950s in Texas, some guy approached her mother (my grandmother) and asked to buy my mother. Her mother's response was not to react in disgust, call the police, etc.. Her response was something like 'Hmm. How much?'
is that the guy (sorry not going to use the word dude for a possible child seller) who tried to sell some kids, or is it just an illustration for some bad guy with a sissy tattoo on his cheek?
So now it's illegal to have a sketchy sense of humor? Isn't this sort of thing protected by the First Amendment? It's not like he actually went through with trying to enslave his kids or anything.
Here's hoping a judge tosses this pile of nonsense quickly.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
You're under arrest for child cruelty, child endangerment, depriving children of food, selling children as food and misrepresenting the weight of livestock.
"goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
Who would want to buy a self inducing debt system? That's the worst deal on craigslist.
Defective Logic
It's really hard to tell exactly what's going on here based on this messed up article, but I think I've figured it out: Santiago makes a hoax posting on craigslist hoping for a media firestorm. Nobody notices. Santiago reports the posting to Child Protective Services intending to stoke the fire. Police figure out he's the guy that made the original posting which is obviously a joke and charge him with making a false report for wasting their time.
Am I close?
No... it never said he reported it. He caused alarm by posting the fake ad and they’re charging him with a misdemeanor.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
http://www.kptv.com/news/15717620/detail.html
strange world we live in!
*sigh* no. It's not illegal and he wasn't charged with "trying to sell his kids on CL." The title contradicts the body.
Is slashdot a clearinghouse for garbage news now?
Fuck off.
Sincerely,
Red Chief.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
If he didn't report himself, why would he be charged with falsely reporting an incident?
Hubec got it. Stagnitto made a Craigslist ad, offering his children up for sale. Stagnitto then report the ad to CPS.
Because he falsely reported that he was selling his kids.
In any case, turning someone in isn’t illegal. Not even turning yourself in, which is what he’d have been doing if he reported his own ad. The ad was illegal; reporting it was not.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
But... turning yourself in if you're not guilty would be illegal.
William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
Why is if when I click on comments to Idle topics rather than just expanding the comment on this page it opens it in a new window? It's been doing this for months and I've realise it's never going to get fixed so am I the only one getting this?
He was guilty. Of posting the false ad. And that is what he was charged with.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
You could not pay me enough money to buy a child!
"I went to the movie theatre. The sign said 'Children 12 and under - $5.00'. I said, 'Give me two girls and a boy.'"
nt
<Complete your profile by adding a signature!>
If you don't clean up your room SO HELP ME I'll SELL YOU on CRAIGSLIST!!!
when my children were naughty when selling them looked very attractive ......
Unfortunately for the father, Sony (those lying cheat bastard fucks) had already laid claim to the children.
Not sure how folks couldn't spot this as a hoax right off the bat. A real advertisment would have offered *paying* someone to take the children. (Free Shipping, Next Day Delivery)
Reading the responses gave me another idea (I don't think any of the replies hit on it directly). Maybe the cops are interpreting his original post as a claim of child abuse; i.e. he's claiming he himself is abusing his children (he's trying to sell them after all). The cops have to investigate this hoax and therefore he's charged with falsely reporting an incident.
I'm not sure that this stands up though... If I come to you with hot dogs strapped to my chest and threaten to blow myself up. Then you - without my knowledge - call the cops, should I be charged?
It costed my aunt to adopt a child through CPS in which she payed $40k for two half-chinese half-nativeamerican children from Mt. Angel over in Oregon.
The primary cause for adoptions in which you pay the government is apparently there is such emotional baggage with many children that the one's without emotional baggage are marked as clean and ready to integrate. I figure this is there way of saying that the uncostly children require all kinds of investments that go above and beyond parenting, and THAT PISSES ME OFF. What kind of sick corporation would take children that need any kind of decent parents and try to offset the cost of adoption with what they say "GOES BEYOND NORMAL PARENTING" ?? It's not racist, and looking at the rate of adoption there is more baggage with black children according to CPS because they say it is such a long chain of entrenched bad parenting that it truly takes a supernatural force to allegedly inspire this race of children to go beyond what they were born into. Sure the Department of Justice might publish that 9 out of 10 racial crimes are black men against white women. You heard me right. But I am outright PISSED OFF that anyone would have the audacity and pomp to put a price tag on any race of children because that just has ZOO written all over it. Think of the gloved-hand relationship these bastard CPS employees have with these expensive children, and think of the false presumptions they are spreading in their behaving that any one color of children is more desirable over others.
When you put a value on children, this makes them a target. I remember the movie RANSOM starring Mel Gibson will prove my point. They are all terrorists in government clothing. They are no different than a church service they compel onto children.
My motto is a child doesn't sign a contract because they are royalty and future heirs. They go wherever they want like a Hindu cow. If a child wants to play in your yard peacefully, then feel blessed they chose your yard and not some pederast's or drug dealer's yard. A child is not a walking nugget of gold: they are light of the world and a warmth playing in the fields that give reason to wake-up and work hard for a living to see their smile and their joy because it so-inspires the oldest and most frail to dream again and feel younger than they are.
Puting a value on children is an insurance scam, because if one is insured for such a value and dies in "custody" of a CPS employee, then who the fuck gets payed on their alleged investment????
New York Laws: Penal Code 240.50:
240.50 Falsely reporting an incident in the third degree.
A person is guilty of falsely reporting an incident in the third
degree when, knowing the information reported, conveyed or circulated to
be false or baseless, he:
1. Initiates or circulates a false report or warning of an alleged
occurrence or impending occurrence of a crime, catastrophe or emergency
under circumstances in which it is not unlikely that public alarm or
inconvenience will result; or
2. Reports, by word or action, to an official or quasi-official agency
or organization having the function of dealing with emergencies
involving danger to life or property, an alleged occurrence or impending
occurrence of a catastrophe or emergency which did not in fact occur or
does not in fact exist; or
3. Gratuitously reports to a law enforcement officer or agency (a) the
alleged occurrence of an offense or incident which did not in fact
occur; or (b) an allegedly impending occurrence of an offense or
incident which in fact is not about to occur; or (c) false information
relating to an actual offense or incident or to the alleged implication
of some person therein; or
4. Reports, by word or action, an alleged occurrence or condition of
child abuse or maltreatment which did not in fact occur or exist to:
(a) the statewide central register of child abuse and maltreatment, as
defined in title six of article six of the social services law, or
(b) any person required to report cases of suspected child abuse or
maltreatment pursuant to subdivision one of section four hundred
thirteen of the social services law, knowing that the person is required
to report such cases, and with the intent that such an alleged
occurrence be reported to the statewide central register.
Falsely reporting an incident in the third degree is a class A
misdemeanor.
He is being charged with making the actual report, not for post claiming a sale of his children.
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
In any case, turning someone in isn’t illegal. Not even turning yourself in, which is what he’d have been doing if he reported his own ad. The ad was illegal; reporting it was not.
Actually, if you are attempting to turn yourself in claiming facts which you know to be false, it is a crime in the State of New York. In fact, it's "Falsely Reporting an Incident in the Third Degree"... exactly what the man is being charged with.
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
Attempting to turn yourself in is not likely to result in public harm or inconvenience. Posting a fake ad on Craigslist claiming that you’re selling your kids is likely to result in this, because it alarms people.
I challenge you to find any source that explicitly says either (a) he made the report or (b) he is being charged for making the report. All of them say “a report was made” and “he is being charged for falsely reporting an incident”. In fact, the officer explicitly stated why he was charged, if you go to the original source that reported on it: (and yes, the grammar of this is hideous, but at least it’s pretty unambiguous)
He was charged because he created public alarm by posting false information, namely that he wanted to sell his children.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
It created public alarm?
If he'd said that terrorists were about to set off a dirty nuke, a tsunami was imminent, or the martians had invaded you might have a point.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Charged with != guilty of.
That's why we have juries.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I found a link with real information and accurate details in the matter:
http://www.whec.com/news/stories/S1526702.shtml?cat=566
"The fact that I'm being charged for anything is so ridiculous, then the fact that they charged me with falsely reporting an incident. What incident did I report?"
"When he initiates an advertisement that causes an alarm or a public annoyance, that is according to New York State penal against the law," says State Trooper Mark O'Donnell. "Similar to someone yelling out fire in a restaurant where there is no fire."
So, their claim is that attempting to sell your children on craigslist is equivalent to yelling "fire" in a theater, as it would be a violation of more specifically New York Penal Code 240.50(1).
I don't expect the charges to be upheld, any good lawyer worth his salt should be able to point out that the statute does not by matter of semantics fit the actual circumstances.
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
It's not like the children would sell.
sure, he'd get emails that said they were interested, but it's not like anyone's actually going to come over and pick them up.
first they'll play email tag, then finally say they'll show up on a certain day, not show up. after a bit of email tag, they'll make a new date, not show up.
So you go with the next peeps and they do the same thing. Pretty soon your just throwing whatever away because it's been a waste of your time.
Be seeing you...
Are you saying that a parent can't sell their kids? Seems to me that may be an effective disciplinary action.
I know that when I was 5 my brother threatened to take me back to Sears and get a new brother. I believed him.
And seriously, being able to sell your kid may get him a better home than the adoption or foster care agencies.
So the key to this is that if you are going to do a prank on a list like this:
* Connect to a free email service using an anonymizer, or connecting at an internet cafe. (Better -- do both) Use an anonymizer that is not inside the country.
* Set up a new account.
* Using that account, set up your craigs list account
* Posting from an anonymous source offer your kids up for sale, or offer bonsai kittens, or cooking lessons in How to Wok Your Dog.
Post pictures. (If pics of kids use ones from outside your neighborhood.) I'd suggest making the post in a city not your own.
I can see a big fad for this sort of thing, especially in the highschool/college set. It would be fun, it doesn't hurt anyone directly, and it gets everyone stirred up.
Remember back in school, when you'd tease one kid just to see him go ballistic? As soon as he learned self control and ignored you it wasn't fun anymore, and you stopped. This is the same thing.
The response is inappropriate, which is why it's news. The proper response is just to delete the post, and ignore it.
In general publicising the threat gives the agent the attention he craves. Bomb scare? Do the check, but don't put it in the news.
Or better ignore it. Sure, people may get killed. People die anyway.
911 killed fewer people in the U.S. than annually slip and die in the bathtub.
A person has a life span of 75 years. A year is about 8000 hours. About 600,000 hours per lifespan.
With all the crap airflights now take an extra hour per flight. So how many lifespans per year are used up in the reaction to 911.
The better reaction to 911 would be 'business as usual' while improving the behind the scenes security.
Yes... that is what I’ve been saying all along.
The statute absolutely does fit the situation. The incident that he falsely reported was “I’m selling my kids” when he was, in fact, not selling his kids.
His Craigslist ad was “a false report or warning of an alleged occurrence or impending occurrence of a crime”. The crime: selling his kids. The ad indicated that this crime was impending. This was false.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
I too would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7.
In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
Really.
More accurately, he did not give a "report or warning" of anything.
While I understand your relief in finally being understood, the idiocy of the authorities in this matter is the reason for the confusion. It's difficult for me to believe that they would have made this charge without him being the one to report his own ad.
While I'm certain that the person actually reporting the incident is indemnified from any criminal or civil actions by statute for reporting any child abuse, I'd like to see them at least try since such indemnification typically requires "good faith".
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
Santa Claus for sale, slightly used, mint condition, likes children and small pets. Still under extended warranty. Behaves grumpy with times.
Beard has to be maintained, has to be washed throughout. Get a red coat with a bit of grime at the bottom for free.
The bottomless bag is broken but should be fairly easy to repair with the right nelfs. Buy now!
(I've posted this ad on e-bay years ago; guess the police is a bit slow today...)
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
More accurately, he did not give a "report or warning" of anything.
Yes he did. His ad qualified as a report or warning.
It's difficult for me to believe that they would have made this charge without him being the one to report his own ad.
Start believing it.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
More accurately, he did not give a "report or warning" of anything.
Yes he did. His ad qualified as a report or warning.
No. He did not.
If I punch at someone, and he falls down, I do not make a "report or warning" that I did such an act. If this were actually staged, and the "punched" individual breaks a blood pack to appear as if he had had his nose broken/bloodied, would it qualify as a "false reporting"? No, it would not.
He neither reported, nor warned any one that he were selling his children... he performed his acts without warning or report.
If someone had actually in reality been attempting to sell their children on craigslist, would we claim that they reported, or provided warning of their criminal action? No. We would not.
If this stands, the chilling effect to our first amendment rights to free speech would be grossly unreasonable.
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
If someone had actually in reality been attempting to sell their children on craigslist, would we claim that they reported, or provided warning of their criminal action? No. We would not.
If people saw the ad and ignored it, then yes, they had plenty of warning.
Did it look factual? Then it was a report. Did it imply that a crime would be committed? Then it was a warning.
If this stands, the chilling effect to our first amendment rights to free speech would be grossly unreasonable.
Methinks you’re grossly exaggerating the significance of this. You can’t go around saying that you are going to commit a crime; it worries people.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
If people saw the ad and ignored it, then yes, they had plenty of warning.
Did it look factual? Then it was a report. Did it imply that a crime would be committed? Then it was a warning.
It was not made as a warning, therefore not a warning. Crimes nearly universally require mens rea, or an intent to break the law. If he didn't intend this as a warning, this necessary condition fails.
It was not made to look factual, it stated explicitly that it was a joke: (paraphrased) "oh shut up liberals, this is a joke".
Methinks you’re grossly exaggerating the significance of this. You can’t go around saying that you are going to commit a crime; it worries people.
This individual was not saying that he was going to commit a crime. He was jokingly pretending to be committing a crime.
The police are just charging him, because they didn't like his joke... but guess what? That's not a good enough reason to charge someone.
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
It was not made to look factual, it stated explicitly that it was a joke: (paraphrased) "oh shut up liberals, this is a joke".
There you have hit upon the one claim he has going in his favour. However, it is quite probable that people would miss that little bit at the very bottom of his ad... and enough people obviously took him seriously enough that the police got involved, and also took him seriously until they determined that it was a prank.
This individual was not saying that he was going to commit a crime. He was jokingly pretending to be committing a crime.
When the police get involved and take the matter seriously, it is enough reason to charge someone.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
When the police get involved and take the matter seriously, it is enough reason to charge someone.
No. It is not. If you believe it is, then you're part of the reason why we're losing rights in the nation.
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
Some people get alarmed when a guy on the internet says he’s selling his kids. Is that really surprising?
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
If the police got involved because a threat of a crime was made that seemed legitimate enough to necessitate their involvement to investigate whether the threat was true, I should’ve said.
I’ve been a little hesitant to come down on this. What the guy was pretty clearly against the law, at least as it is stated and interpreted. Whether or not I agree with the law is something that I was trying to avoid; I basically tried to stick to simply explaining what he’s charged with, how the law is interpreted, and how the law fits the situation under the interpretation they make of the law.
But basically, I support the law. You can’t just have people threatening to commit crimes and thinking it’s all a big joke. It’s not funny, it frightens people, it wastes the police’s time, and it could divert their resources when they were critically needed elsewhere.
Is the enforcement of the law a little bit harsh in this case? Probably. But I could also see situations where it’s definitely warranted, and deciding what to do in marginal cases like this is better done in the courtroom, not in the legislature. My personal opinion? The guy was wrong to do what he did. Not felony wrong, but misdemeanor wrong. Give him a little fine, slap him on the wrist, and let him go, hopefully to be a little more prudent in the future.
Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
I simply have to disagree. While I understand that your interpretation of the law holds that this still fits the legal definition, my interpretation is one that the law simply fails to apply. Although you are most definitely correct, the best place to determine this is in court.
But it would be better for the DA to have enough common sense to look at the charge, look at the facts, and realize that he will be wasting government resources by charging this person for wasting government resources.
Seriously, this person is going to get a slap on the wrist, and any fine will likely be suspended so long as he does not violate another law in X amount of time.
WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
I see your signature Clone, however, isn't Jeremy Reimer the guy who had parts of his website removed for libelling APK by his hosting provider and Reimer was caught email harassing APK by his ISP, Shaw of Canada, when Shaw put Reimer on a tracking ticket for it (which Reimer promptly ceased his email harassment of APK once he was aware of that happening), and arstechnica strangely no longer puts up articles by the blatantly unqualified Jeremy Reimer? Jeremy Reimer and his friends Jay Little also had their websites removed entirely from CrystalTech.com and from petitiononline.com also, because of their making death threats to APK just because APK showed that Exchange Server stalls due to memory fragmentation are stopped when a memory optimization program is used (microsoft's own called clearmem.exe) after Jay Little, whom Jeremy Reimer brought in because Reimer doesn't even have a degree or years to decades of professional hands-on experience in the trenches doing computer work, failed in stating verbatim "I am an Exchange Expert" and when Jay Little saw what APK put up, he tried to harass APK by nitpicking his posts at NTCompatible.com also, where Little stalked APK there and failed on issues regarding ramdisks/ssd and also Windows own error codes/crash codes which got Jay Little kicked from NTCompatible.com as it did on Channel 9 at Microsoft also? Seems that was what happened at Windows IT Pro here http://windowsitpro.com/article/articleid/41095/the-memory-optimization-hoax.html which anyone can read. So much for your libelling others Clone. You can't even get that right.
I see your signature Clone, however, isn't Jeremy Reimer the guy who had parts of his website removed for libelling APK by his hosting provider and Reimer was caught email harassing APK by his ISP, Shaw of Canada, when Shaw put Reimer on a tracking ticket for it (which Reimer promptly ceased his email harassment of APK once he was aware of that happening), and arstechnica strangely no longer puts up articles by the blatantly unqualified Jeremy Reimer? Jeremy Reimer and his friends Jay Little also had their websites removed entirely from CrystalTech.com and from petitiononline.com also, because of their making death threats to APK just because APK showed that Exchange Server stalls due to memory fragmentation are stopped when a memory optimization program is used (microsoft's own called clearmem.exe) after Jay Little, whom Jeremy Reimer brought in because Reimer doesn't even have a degree or years to decades of professional hands-on experience in the trenches doing computer work, failed in stating verbatim "I am an Exchange Expert" and when Jay Little saw what APK put up, he tried to harass APK by nitpicking his posts at NTCompatible.com also, where Little stalked APK there and failed on issues regarding ramdisks/ssd and also Windows own error codes/crash codes which got Jay Little kicked from NTCompatible.com as it did on Channel 9 at Microsoft also? Seems that was what happened at Windows IT Pro here http://windowsitpro.com/article/articleid/41095/the-memory-optimization-hoax.html which anyone can read. So much for your libelling others Clone. You can't even get that right.
I see your signature Clone, however, isn't Jeremy Reimer the guy who had parts of his website removed for libelling APK by his hosting provider and Reimer was caught email harassing APK by his ISP, Shaw of Canada, when Shaw put Reimer on a tracking ticket for it (which Reimer promptly ceased his email harassment of APK once he was aware of that happening), and arstechnica strangely no longer puts up articles by the blatantly unqualified Jeremy Reimer? Jeremy Reimer and his friends Jay Little also had their websites removed entirely from CrystalTech.com and from petitiononline.com also, because of their making death threats to APK just because APK showed that Exchange Server stalls due to memory fragmentation are stopped when a memory optimization program is used (microsoft's own called clearmem.exe) after Jay Little, whom Jeremy Reimer brought in because Reimer doesn't even have a degree or years to decades of professional hands-on experience in the trenches doing computer work, failed in stating verbatim "I am an Exchange Expert" and when Jay Little saw what APK put up, he tried to harass APK by nitpicking his posts at NTCompatible.com also, where Little stalked APK there and failed on issues regarding ramdisks/ssd and also Windows own error codes/crash codes which got Jay Little kicked from NTCompatible.com as it did on Channel 9 at Microsoft also? Seems that was what happened at Windows IT Pro here http://windowsitpro.com/article/articleid/41095/the-memory-optimization-hoax.html which anyone can read. So much for your libelling others Clone. You can't even get that right and you certainly like lies and libel, which are against the law in the USA and in other nations also.
"But basically, I support the law http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1629374&cid=31995628" - by clone53421 (1310749) on Tuesday April 27, @02:40AM (#31995628)
Ahem: Bullshit - Clone, I noted that you also called APK, the person you refer to in your signature here, a "spyware maker" http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1591778&cid=31736454 , but he noted that Nir Sofer and Dr. Mark Russinovich have also had many of their wares classified falsely as spywares too, and that he took CA's 21 point test and his app did not violate a single point of their test and they downrated his app to "zero threat levels" because of this. APK also put up the very first guide to securing Windows back in 1998 which was highly rated at Neowin in 2001 and grew into the most viewed and most effective guide for securing Windows NT Operating Systems out there currently at 350,000 views strong and being made a sticky pinned thread, an essential guide, or being the most viewed and being usually rated 5 of 5 stars by readers of his security guide for Windows such as here http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=f94b12f3d43b3b9446bed90155910842&showtopic=2662 . At 350,000 views strong and with great feedback too, your calling him that shows you do anything but support the law, and regularly break it with libel on your part towards others clone. You are a scumbag libelling little weasel clone, and now everyone will know how much so, after reading this reply.
"But basically, I support the law http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1629374&cid=31995628" - by clone53421 (1310749) on Tuesday April 27, @02:40AM (#31995628)
Ahem: Bullshit - Clone, I noted that you also called APK, the person you refer to in your signature here, a "spyware maker" http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1591778&cid=31736454 , but he noted that Nir Sofer and Dr. Mark Russinovich have also had many of their wares classified falsely as spywares too, and that he took CA's 21 point test and his app did not violate a single point of their test and they downrated his app to "zero threat levels" because of this. APK also put up the very first guide to securing Windows back in 1998 which was highly rated at Neowin in 2001 and grew into the most viewed and most effective guide for securing Windows NT Operating Systems out there currently at 350,000 views strong and being made a sticky pinned thread, an essential guide, or being the most viewed and being usually rated 5 of 5 stars by readers of his security guide for Windows such as here http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=f94b12f3d43b3b9446bed90155910842&showtopic=2662 . At 350,000 views strong and with great feedback too, your calling him that shows you do anything but support the law, and regularly break it with libel on your part towards others clone. You are a scumbag libelling little weasel clone, and now everyone will know how much so, after reading this reply.
It is to anyone who knows what "alarm" means. I even supplied two examples of genuinely alarming things.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
"But basically, I support the law http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1629374&cid=31995628" - by clone53421 (1310749) on Tuesday April 27, @02:40AM (#31995628)
I see your comment quoted above there Clone, as well as you signature Clone in your attempt to libel others here on slashdot. So, isn't Jeremy Reimer the guy who had parts of his website removed for libelling APK by his hosting provider and Reimer was caught email harassing APK by his ISP, Shaw of Canada, when Shaw put Reimer on a tracking ticket for it (which Reimer promptly ceased his email harassment of APK once he was aware of that happening), and arstechnica strangely no longer puts up articles by the blatantly unqualified Jeremy Reimer? Jeremy Reimer and his friends Jay Little also had their websites removed entirely from CrystalTech.com and from petitiononline.com also, because of their making death threats to APK just because APK showed that Exchange Server stalls due to memory fragmentation are stopped when a memory optimization program is used (microsoft's own called clearmem.exe) after Jay Little, whom Jeremy Reimer brought in because Reimer doesn't even have a degree or years to decades of professional hands-on experience in the trenches doing computer work, failed in stating verbatim "I am an Exchange Expert" and when Jay Little saw what APK put up, he tried to harass APK by nitpicking his posts at NTCompatible.com also, where Little stalked APK there and failed on issues regarding ramdisks/ssd and also Windows own error codes/crash codes which got Jay Little kicked from NTCompatible.com as it did on Channel 9 at Microsoft also? Seems that was what happened at Windows IT Pro here http://windowsitpro.com/article/articleid/41095/the-memory-optimization-hoax.html which anyone can read. So much for your libelling others Clone. You can't even get that right and you certainly like lies and libel, which are against the law in the USA and in other nations also.
Clone, I also note that you also called APK, the person you refer to in your signature here, a "spyware maker" http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1591778&cid=31736454 , but he noted that Nir Sofer and Dr. Mark Russinovich have also had many of their wares classified falsely as spywares too, and that he took CA's 21 point test and his app did not violate a single point of their test and they downrated his app to "zero threat levels" because of this. APK also put up the very first guide to securing Windows back in 1998 which was highly rated at Neowin in 2001 and grew into the most viewed and most effective guide for securing Windows NT Operating Systems out there currently at 350,000 views strong and being made a sticky pinned thread, an essential guide, or being the most viewed and being usually rated 5 of 5 stars by readers of his security guide for Windows such as here http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=f94b12f3d43b3b9446bed90155910842&showtopic=2662 . At 350,000 views strong and with great feedback too, your calling him that shows you do anything but support the law, and regularly break it with libel on your part towards others clone. You are a scumbag libelling little weasel clone, and now everyone will know how much so, after reading this reply. Just because you're a loser that doesn't have a job and because you've never done a thing in your life that's of service to others, doesn't give you the right to libel others who have, clone.
"But basically, I support the law http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1629374&cid=31995628" - by clone53421 (1310749) on Tuesday April 27, @02:40AM (#31995628)
I see your comment quoted above there Clone, as well as you signature Clone in your attempt to libel others here on slashdot. So, isn't Jeremy Reimer the guy who had parts of his website removed for libelling APK by his hosting provider and Reimer was caught email harassing APK by his ISP, Shaw of Canada, when Shaw put Reimer on a tracking ticket for it (which Reimer promptly ceased his email harassment of APK once he was aware of that happening), and arstechnica strangely no longer puts up articles by the blatantly unqualified Jeremy Reimer? Jeremy Reimer and his friends Jay Little also had their websites removed entirely from CrystalTech.com and from petitiononline.com also, because of their making death threats to APK just because APK showed that Exchange Server stalls due to memory fragmentation are stopped when a memory optimization program is used (microsoft's own called clearmem.exe) after Jay Little, whom Jeremy Reimer brought in because Reimer doesn't even have a degree or years to decades of professional hands-on experience in the trenches doing computer work, failed in stating verbatim "I am an Exchange Expert" and when Jay Little saw what APK put up, he tried to harass APK by nitpicking his posts at NTCompatible.com also, where Little stalked APK there and failed on issues regarding ramdisks/ssd and also Windows own error codes/crash codes which got Jay Little kicked from NTCompatible.com as it did on Channel 9 at Microsoft also? Seems that was what happened at Windows IT Pro here http://windowsitpro.com/article/articleid/41095/the-memory-optimization-hoax.html which anyone can read. So much for your libelling others Clone. You can't even get that right and you certainly like lies and libel, which are against the law in the USA and in other nations also.
Clone, I also note that you also called APK, the person you refer to in your signature here, a "spyware maker" http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1591778&cid=31736454 , but he noted that Nir Sofer and Dr. Mark Russinovich have also had many of their wares classified falsely as spywares too, and that he took CA's 21 point test and his app did not violate a single point of their test and they downrated his app to "zero threat levels" because of this. APK also put up the very first guide to securing Windows back in 1998 which was highly rated at Neowin in 2001 and grew into the most viewed and most effective guide for securing Windows NT Operating Systems out there currently at 350,000 views strong and being made a sticky pinned thread, an essential guide, or being the most viewed and being usually rated 5 of 5 stars by readers of his security guide for Windows such as here http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=f94b12f3d43b3b9446bed90155910842&showtopic=2662 . At 350,000 views strong and with great feedback too, your calling him that shows you do anything but support the law, and regularly break it with libel on your part towards others clone. You are a scumbag libelling little weasel clone, and now everyone will know how much so, after reading this reply. Just because you're a loser that doesn't have a job and because you've never done a thing in your life that's of service to others, doesn't give you the right to libel others who have, clone.
"But basically, I support the law http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1629374&cid=31995628" - by clone53421 (1310749) on Tuesday April 27, @02:40AM (#31995628)
I see your comment quoted above there Clone, as well as you signature Clone in your attempt to libel others here on slashdot. So, isn't Jeremy Reimer the guy who had parts of his website removed for libelling APK by his hosting provider and Reimer was caught email harassing APK by his ISP, Shaw of Canada, when Shaw put Reimer on a tracking ticket for it (which Reimer promptly ceased his email harassment of APK once he was aware of that happening), and arstechnica strangely no longer puts up articles by the blatantly unqualified Jeremy Reimer? Jeremy Reimer and his friends Jay Little also had their websites removed entirely from CrystalTech.com and from petitiononline.com also, because of their making death threats to APK just because APK showed that Exchange Server stalls due to memory fragmentation are stopped when a memory optimization program is used (microsoft's own called clearmem.exe) after Jay Little, whom Jeremy Reimer brought in because Reimer doesn't even have a degree or years to decades of professional hands-on experience in the trenches doing computer work, failed in stating verbatim "I am an Exchange Expert" and when Jay Little saw what APK put up, he tried to harass APK by nitpicking his posts at NTCompatible.com also, where Little stalked APK there and failed on issues regarding ramdisks/ssd and also Windows own error codes/crash codes which got Jay Little kicked from NTCompatible.com as it did on Channel 9 at Microsoft also? Seems that was what happened at Windows IT Pro here http://windowsitpro.com/article/articleid/41095/the-memory-optimization-hoax.html which anyone can read. So much for your libelling others Clone. You can't even get that right and you certainly like lies and libel, which are against the law in the USA and in other nations also.
Clone, I also note that you also called APK, the person you refer to in your signature here, a "spyware maker" http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1591778&cid=31736454 , but he noted that Nir Sofer and Dr. Mark Russinovich have also had many of their wares classified falsely as spywares too, and that he took CA's 21 point test and his app did not violate a single point of their test and they downrated his app to "zero threat levels" because of this. APK also put up the very first guide to securing Windows back in 1998 which was highly rated at Neowin in 2001 and grew into the most viewed and most effective guide for securing Windows NT Operating Systems out there currently at 350,000 views strong and being made a sticky pinned thread, an essential guide, or being the most viewed and being usually rated 5 of 5 stars by readers of his security guide for Windows such as here http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=f94b12f3d43b3b9446bed90155910842&showtopic=2662 . At 350,000 views strong and with great feedback too, your calling him that shows you do anything but support the law, and regularly break it with libel on your part towards others clone.
You are a scumbag libelling little weasel clone, and now everyone will know how much so, after reading this reply. Just because you're a loser that doesn't have a job and because you've never done a thing in your life that's of service to others, doesn't give you the right to libel others who have, clone.
See subject above, and here's why Clone tried to libel others here on this website via his signature and was proven wrong here: http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1632188&cid=31999288
(Funny how that shut clone53421 up & he isn't responding anymore on it.)
Clone53421 is nothing more than a little out of work bum who can't get a job because he wastes his life on slashdot here libelling others (which is why he won't get a job, because his kind do this rampantly, and this is why suits against them are not worth it - nothing to be had in suing a "ne'er do well" like Clone53421 is why).
Why is Clone libelling apk? Ok:
----
Mozilla Firefox DOM Node Moving Use-After-Free Vulnerability:
http://secunia.com/advisories/39175/
Release Date 2010-04-02
Last Update 2010-04-06
----
Clone lost his behind in a debate with apk on FireFox http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/03/23/0415208/Germany-Warns-Against-Using-Firefox (when Germany warned vs. its usage, as they had for IE previous to that) here, regarding FireFox 3.6, which then forced a reissue of FireFox 3.6.2 (not 2.6.2 as Clone erroneously noted it there as also), but during the timeframe of that debate (03/23/2010 - 04/05/2010)?
LOL: FireFox turned up YET ANOTHER SECURITY BUG in their DOM during that debate's timeframe (see between dashed lines above), which forced an issuance of FireFox 3.6.3 on 04/06/2010!
Also, when that news of a NEW FIREFOX BUG came out?
Well - Slashdot's moderators "strangely closed that thread on Germany early" (NOT) in less than 2 weeks...
This libel of apk only showed Clone's poor defense of FireFox (inclusive of citing very old 3-5 versions out of date data on Opera bugs no less, version 9.52 & 10.52 just released today no less in final form) as erroneous, and that Clone is a sore loser.
Clone, face it: Opera's FASTER than FireFox in HTML parse & process work, plus javascript work too, and Opera shows less bugs over time than FireFox does, consistently no less... whether or not you can handle that or not, doesn't matter - you LOSE, as per usual.
Still - They're ALL pretty good browsers though, but this "little tidbit" from a "hacker-cracker/security researcher" MAY "shed a bit of light on the subject" of which browser to use (Because Opera's the overall FASTEST currently & especially on the MOST USED OS PLATFORM THERE IS ON PCs/Servers in Windows, & consistently over time, @ HTML parse work, & again has re-seized its crown in Javascript processing speeds as well, vs. FireFox currently (which typically, Opera led FF there as well over time MOST of the time too)):
----
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/25/pwn2own_2010_day_one/
"The problem Microsoft has is they have a big market share, said Vreugdenhil, the hacker who attacked IE. "I use Opera, but that's basically because it has a tiny market share and as far as I know, nobody is really interested in creating a drive-by download for opera. The web at the moment is pretty scary, actually."
----
Nuff said, on the subject of which browser even the "hacker/cracker/security researcher types" use, & why (security-by-obscurity, @ THE VERY LEAST).
All the libelling of others online will not help you, once people see how you react in your "geek angst" when you lose poorly due to bogus libelling of others on this website, which makes you appear in your true nature of being a libellous online scumbag weasel.
See subject above, and see how Clone tried to libel others here on this website via his signature and was proven wrong here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1632188&cid=31999288 .
Funny how that shut clone53421, eh?
Clone53421 is nothing more than a little out of work bum who can't get a job because he wastes his life on slashdot here libelling others (which is why he won't get a job, because his kind do this rampantly, and this is why suits against them are not worth it - nothing to be had in suing a "ne'er do well" like Clone53421 is why).
Why is Clone libelling apk? Ok:
----
Mozilla Firefox DOM Node Moving Use-After-Free Vulnerability:
http://secunia.com/advisories/39175/
Release Date 2010-04-02
Last Update 2010-04-06
----
Clone lost his behind in a debate with apk on FireFox http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/03/23/0415208/Germany-Warns-Against-Using-Firefox (when Germany warned vs. its usage, as they had for IE previous to that) here, regarding FireFox 3.6, which then forced a reissue of FireFox 3.6.2 (not 2.6.2 as Clone erroneously noted it there as also), but during the timeframe of that debate (03/23/2010 - 04/05/2010)?
LOL: FireFox turned up YET ANOTHER SECURITY BUG in their DOM during that debate's timeframe (see between dashed lines above), which forced an issuance of FireFox 3.6.3 on 04/06/2010!
Also, when that news of a NEW FIREFOX BUG came out?
Well - Slashdot's moderators "strangely closed that thread on Germany early" (NOT) in less than 2 weeks...
This libel of apk only showed Clone's poor defense of FireFox (inclusive of citing very old 3-5 versions out of date data on Opera bugs no less, version 9.52 & 10.52 just released today no less in final form) as erroneous, and that Clone is a sore loser.
Clone, face it: Opera's FASTER than FireFox in HTML parse & process work, plus javascript work too, and Opera shows less bugs over time than FireFox does, consistently no less... whether or not you can handle that or not, doesn't matter - you LOSE, as per usual.
Still - They're ALL pretty good browsers though, but this "little tidbit" from a "hacker-cracker/security researcher" MAY "shed a bit of light on the subject" of which browser to use (Because Opera's the overall FASTEST currently & especially on the MOST USED OS PLATFORM THERE IS ON PCs/Servers in Windows, & consistently over time, @ HTML parse work, & again has re-seized its crown in Javascript processing speeds as well, vs. FireFox currently (which typically, Opera led FF there as well over time MOST of the time too)):
----
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/25/pwn2own_2010_day_one/
"The problem Microsoft has is they have a big market share, said Vreugdenhil, the hacker who attacked IE. "I use Opera, but that's basically because it has a tiny market share and as far as I know, nobody is really interested in creating a drive-by download for opera. The web at the moment is pretty scary, actually."
----
Nuff said, on the subject of which browser even the "hacker/cracker/security researcher types" use, & why (security-by-obscurity, @ THE VERY LEAST).
All the libelling of others online will not help you, once people see how you react in your "geek angst" when you lose poorly due to bogus libelling of others on this website, which makes you appear in your true nature of being a libellous online scumbag weasel that you are, clone53421.
See subject above, and see how Clone tried to libel others here on this website via his signature and was proven wrong here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1632188&cid=31999288 .
Funny how that shut clone53421, eh?
Clone53421 is nothing more than a little out of work bum who can't get a job because he wastes his life on slashdot here libelling others (which is why he won't get a job, because his kind do this rampantly, and this is why suits against them are not worth it - nothing to be had in suing a "ne'er do well" like Clone53421 is why).
Why is Clone libelling apk? Ok:
----
Mozilla Firefox DOM Node Moving Use-After-Free Vulnerability:
http://secunia.com/advisories/39175/
Release Date 2010-04-02
Last Update 2010-04-06
----
Clone lost his behind in a debate with apk on FireFox http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/03/23/0415208/Germany-Warns-Against-Using-Firefox (when Germany warned vs. its usage, as they had for IE previous to that) here, regarding FireFox 3.6, which then forced a reissue of FireFox 3.6.2 (not 2.6.2 as Clone erroneously noted it there as also), but during the timeframe of that debate (03/23/2010 - 04/05/2010)?
LOL: FireFox turned up YET ANOTHER SECURITY BUG in their DOM during that debate's timeframe (see between dashed lines above), which forced an issuance of FireFox 3.6.3 on 04/06/2010!
Also, when that news of a NEW FIREFOX BUG came out?
Well - Slashdot's moderators "strangely closed that thread on Germany early" (NOT) in less than 2 weeks...
This libel of apk only showed Clone's poor defense of FireFox (inclusive of citing very old 3-5 versions out of date data on Opera bugs no less, version 9.52 & 10.52 just released today no less in final form) as erroneous, and that Clone is a sore loser.
Clone, face it: Opera's FASTER than FireFox in HTML parse & process work, plus javascript work too, and Opera shows less bugs over time than FireFox does, consistently no less... whether or not you can handle that or not, doesn't matter - you LOSE, as per usual.
Still - They're ALL pretty good browsers though, but this "little tidbit" from a "hacker-cracker/security researcher" MAY "shed a bit of light on the subject" of which browser to use (Because Opera's the overall FASTEST currently & especially on the MOST USED OS PLATFORM THERE IS ON PCs/Servers in Windows, & consistently over time, @ HTML parse work, & again has re-seized its crown in Javascript processing speeds as well, vs. FireFox currently (which typically, Opera led FF there as well over time MOST of the time too)):
----
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/25/pwn2own_2010_day_one/
"The problem Microsoft has is they have a big market share, said Vreugdenhil, the hacker who attacked IE. "I use Opera, but that's basically because it has a tiny market share and as far as I know, nobody is really interested in creating a drive-by download for opera. The web at the moment is pretty scary, actually."
----
Nuff said, on the subject of which browser even the "hacker/cracker/security researcher types" use, & why (security-by-obscurity, @ THE VERY LEAST).
All the libelling of others online will not help you, once people see how you react in your "geek angst" when you lose poorly due to bogus libelling of others on this website, which makes you appear in your true nature of being a libellous online scumbag weasel, clone53421.
Take your paranoid ranting somewhere else where 10 year olds gather perhaps?
Please leave Slashdot for those who can behave like adults.
Spamming just makes you look like a fuckwad with an axe to grind.
Calling someone a libellous weasel and then posting as AC makes you look pathetic.
Leads me to think you are a malware author.
Happy now asshole?
See subject above. The second you see name calling and more libel in calling others crazy is the second you know you have the opponent on the ropes. Good job in giving yourself away clone53421, as you reply as anonymous coward now. Do you think that fools anyone, other than yourself? No, sorry, it does not. You libelled someone and now that the truth of your crap is out you only have your mod downs (keep blowing those mod points, you won't have any left soon and I could care less about what I get rated, this is just me replying as ac is all now) and name calling versus the truth of what you have in your signature here which only shows you are an idiot because you didn't get the real story of how Jeremy Reimer and Jay Little of arstechnica had the law called on them, their isps caught them email harassing this ac apk, and how their websites were removed by their hosting providers too. Hilarious and just desserts to them both. Same to you clone53421. You're not fooling anyone by replying as ac.
See subject above. The second you see name calling and more libel in calling others crazy is the second you know you have the opponent on the ropes. Good job in giving yourself away clone53421, as you reply as anonymous coward now. Do you think that fools anyone, other than yourself? No, sorry, it does not. You libelled someone and now that the truth of your crap is out you only have your mod downs (keep blowing those mod points, you won't have any left soon and I could care less about what I get rated, this is just me replying as ac is all now) and name calling versus the truth of what you have in your signature here which only shows you are an idiot because you didn't get the real story of how Jeremy Reimer and Jay Little of arstechnica had the law called on them, their isps caught them email harassing this ac apk, and how their websites were removed by their hosting providers too. Hilarious and just desserts to them both. Same to you clone53421. You're not fooling anyone by replying as ac either clone53421.
See subject above. The second you see name calling and more libel in calling others crazy is the second you know you have the opponent on the ropes. Good job in giving yourself away clone53421, as you reply as anonymous coward now. Do you think that fools anyone, other than yourself? No, sorry, it does not. You libelled someone and now that the truth of your crap is out you only have your mod downs (no more down modding the ac apks posts anymore for you, haha) and name calling versus the truth of what you have in your signature here which only shows you are an idiot because you didn't get the real story of how Jeremy Reimer and Jay Little of arstechnica had the law called on them, their isps caught them email harassing this ac apk, and how their websites were removed by their hosting providers too. Hilarious and just desserts to them both. Same to you clone53421. You're not fooling anyone by replying as ac.
See subject above. The second you see name calling and more libel in calling others crazy is the second you know you have the opponent on the ropes. Good job in giving yourself away clone53421, as you reply as anonymous coward earlier and falcondouche now. Do you think that fools anyone, other than yourself? No, sorry, it does not. You libelled someone and now that the truth of your crap is out you only have your mod downs (keep blowing those mod points, you won't have any left soon and I could care less about what I get rated, this is just me replying as ac is all now) and name calling versus the truth of what you have in your signature here which only shows you are an idiot because you didn't get the real story of how Jeremy Reimer and Jay Little of arstechnica had the law called on them, their isps caught them email harassing this ac apk, and how their websites were removed by their hosting providers too. Hilarious and just desserts to them both. Same to you clone53421. You're not fooling anyone by replying as ac or by using your other registered accounts to reply now moron. Any idiot knows that if you change your ip address (shut off your system, and modem on many isps you get a new ip address, or you can just rdp into another system and post too, as another option, or use anonymous proxy servers or tor onion routers. Take your pick!) and use another registered account you can 'work miracles' and even mod up a moron like clone53421 (in other words, yourself, falcondouche).
Ah poor widdle AC, you really are paranoid eh?
I had never heard of "Clone" before your piss weak spamming.
Does your mate clone live in Australia? Hmmmm?
Check my posting history kindy boy.
Now for goodness sake grow up and try to act like an adult not a 10 year old.
You are as I said previously spamming a load of paranoid nonsense.
You should note that I have the courage to post logged in, something a pathetic coward like yourself does not do.
I am not going to waste my time replying to you again. But I will mod down any further posts of a similar nature I see.
Its hard to decide whether you are pathetic or amusing.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1619750&cid=32008590
Hilarious. This moron 'falcondouche' has to be the STUPIDEST POSTER ON /., no questions asked, after I read that one.
"I qualified as a Telecommunications tech in 1979" by FalconDOUCHE (1289630)
on Tuesday April 27, @11:42PM (#32008806)
LMAO -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1619750&cid=32008590 see subject above, read url, and rinse-lather-repeat, falconDOUCHE... how stupid can you be? LOL, I bet you did that MERE TECHIE job on lol, telegraphs. I mean based on your dimwit reply in the url above, where you called others names no less?? Please, falconDOUCHE - do you think ANYONE believes that which I quote of you above, after reading the URL below it? LOL, not.
They only said this, in response to your ignorance dumbo, lol:
"you do realise that there was no email in 1979 dont you? Oh of course being 10 you wouldnt" by Falconhell (1289630)
on Wednesday April 28, @12:35AM (#32009320)
Dimwit, there's been email systems since before ARPANET http://www.nethistory.info/History%20of%20the%20Internet/email.html ... utterly unbelievable: Here's a quote from said "HISTORY OF EMAIL":
***
Email is much older than ARPANet or the Internet. It was never invented; it evolved from very simple beginnings.
.
.
.
This is why Ray Tomlinson is credited with inventing email in 1972
***
LMAO, wait wait... it gets BETTER next, below (so "play it again, SAM"):
"I qualified as a Telecommunications tech in 1979" by FalconDOUCHE (1289630)
on Tuesday April 27, @11:42PM (#32008806)
LMAO -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1619750&cid=32008590 see subject above, read url, and rinse-lather-repeat, falconDOUCHE... how stupid can you be? LOL, I bet you did that MERE TECHIE job on lol, telegraphs. I mean based on your dimwit reply in the url above, where you called others names no less??
Please, falconDOUCHE - do you think ANYONE believes that which I quote of you above, after reading the URL below it? LOL, not. Chump YOU make it "too easy" to make you look like a FOOL... you can't even get email right (see url to anyone reading, lol), so you're far from a "telecom tech".
FalconDOUCHE - I have to say it: You are the STUPIDEST person I've ever encountered, literally, on this website in oh, 7 yrs. or so now. I base that on what is above, lmao... hilarious. At least you earn the "dubious honor" of being "STUPIDEST POSTER ON /.", lol (so look at the bright side!)
LMAO - you're right about 1 thing: I didn't HAVE to "land a blow" as you called it - YOU DID THE JOB FOR ME (lmao), read on to those reading... this is "vintage Professor 'FalconDOUCHE'" @ his finest below, lol:
"you do realise that there was no email in 1979 dont you? Oh of course being 10 you wouldnt" by Falconhell (1289630)
on Wednesday April 28, @12:35AM (#32009320)
Dimwit, there's been email systems since before ARPANET http://www.nethistory.info/History%20of%20the%20Internet/email.html ... utterly unbelievable: Here's a quote from said "HISTORY OF EMAIL":
***
Email is much older than ARPANet or the Internet. It was never invented; it evolved from very simple beginnings.
This is why Ray Tomlinson is credited with inventing email in 1972
***
LMAO, wait wait... it gets BETTER next, below (so "play it again, SAM"):
"I qualified as a Telecommunications tech in 1979" by FalconDOUCHE (1289630)
on Tuesday April 27, @11:42PM (#32008806)
LMAO -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1619750&cid=32008590 see subject above, read url, and rinse-lather-repeat, falconDOUCHE... how stupid can you be? LOL, I bet you did that MERE TECHIE job on lol, telegraphs.
I mean based on your dimwit reply in the url above, where you messed up on the fact that hotmail does give away your IP address, and where YOU called others names no less??
LMAO!
(Man - Please, falconDOUCHE - do you think ANYONE believes that which I quote of you above, after reading the URL below it? LOL, not. LOL, you can't even get email right (see url to anyone reading, lol))
LOL, per the subject-line above? Whatever it is you are smoking is making you "peer into different alternate dimensions" because your history of email below? LMAO!
(I suspect that years ago some neighbor of yours found out you smoked pot, and said he had some (whilst he was furiously grinding up some pine cones or something instead, lol) and he sold you it, saying it was (what was it you called Aussie pot? Ah yes -> ) "the finest there is" (lol, and judging by your performance here "Professor FalconDOUCHE"? You're DEFINITELY still smoking that "same fine stuff" LOL!)...
Ah, read on for a laugh people, because this shit's hilarious (I have to give FalconDOUCHE 1 thing - his mistakes make me laugh hugely, so much so, my stomach hurts):
"you do realise that there was no email in 1979 dont you? Oh of course being 10 you wouldnt" by FalconDOUCHE (1289630)
on Wednesday April 28, @12:35AM (#32009320)
Dimwit, there's been email systems since before ARPANET http://www.nethistory.info/History%20of%20the%20Internet/email.html ... utterly unbelievable: Here's a quote from said "HISTORY OF EMAIL":
***
Email is much older than ARPANet or the Internet. It was never invented; it evolved from very simple beginnings.
This is why Ray Tomlinson is credited with inventing email in 1972
***
LMAO, wait wait... it gets BETTER next, below (so "play it again, SAM"):
"I qualified as a Telecommunications tech in 1979" by FalconDOUCHE (1289630)
on Tuesday April 27, @11:42PM (#32008806)
LMAO -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1619750&cid=32008590 see subject above, read url, and rinse-lather-repeat, falconDOUCHE... how stupid can you be? LOL, I bet you did that MERE TECHIE job on lol, telegraphs.
I mean based on your dimwit reply in the url above, where you messed up on the fact that hotmail does give away your IP address, and where YOU called others names no less?? LMAO!
(Man - Please, falconDOUCHE - do you think ANYONE believes that which I quote of you above, after reading the URL below it? LOL, not! LMAO... you can't even get email right (see url to anyone reading, lol), so you're far from a "telecom tech").
About "landing a blow"? Hell, I didn't even HAVE TO TAKE A SWING, lol... you KNOCKED YOURSELF RIGHT OUT with what's above, lmao!
I'm not angry man. Never was. It's generally very easy for me to take a down mod happy troll like you apart with ease... especially you, because you? You made the job easy to do, as you only did yourself in with huge mistakes.
This is yet another:
"Ah yes hotmail got my IP, along with completely false registration info, thats gonna really hurt me!" - by FalconDOUCHE (1289630)
on Wednesday April 28, @01:35AM (#32009954)
Hmmm, didn't you call others here malware makers or hackers today? Funny, but what you're doing is exactly what hacker/cracker types do. Pot calling the kettle black now, are we, "Professor FalconDOUCHE"??
Piece of SOLID (and yes, actually friendly) advice - don't go advertising that you do hotmail like that for one thing, and secondly? With your IP address, I can "zero in" pretty much within 50-100 miles of your location. That's not much to worry about, but I can resolve who your hosting provider is, and with evidence like you stating you fake hotmails and such?? It's enough to put you on a tracking ticket. I know, I worked for one of the worlds LARGEST BSP's in 2003-2004 in their NOC, and know what happens, and it doesn't take much for that to occur (tracking tickets/surveillances of users).
apk says here he’s BUSY AS HELL:
well you sure could have fooled me...
yes, apk is definitely BUSY AS HELL!:
#31581460 #31582722 #31582896 #31583030 #31583334 #31584042 #31584232 #31584570 #31585028 #31585182 #31599452 #31602524 #31603116 #31603522 #31609050 #31612540 #31612814 #31613160 #31618278 #31627354 #31703250 #31740066 #31740432 #31740880 #31743526 #31766346 #31766428 #31766442 #31766482 #31766528 #31766550 #31766590 #31766616 #31766658 #31766714 #31880668 #31880840 #31880878 #31880900 #31880932 #31880952 #31880980 #31880992 #31881052 #31881072 #31881086
Oh look, it's the troll that's been stalking Clone53421, Squiggleslash, Falconhell, GM Howell, Red Flayer, and Tom Hudson.
For those new to this, the troll is someone claiming to be a defender of a certain Alexander Peter Kowalski, the author of a tool, apkapp2backgrounddaemonprocessengine, generally considered malware by a large number of anti-malware companies and organizations.
CA
PestPatrol
SpywareDB ("Dangerous!")
Freedom Anti-Spyware
Spycheck (Spanish-language) - "Recomendacion: DESACTIVAR Y ELIMINAR"
Spyware No-More ("Threat risk: High risk", "Advice: Remove This is a very high risk threat and should be removed immediately as to prevent harm to your computer and / or to protect your privacy")
Mr Kowalski, or his admirer, got upset because someone had the audacity to link to a threat describing Kowalski's attempts to remove some embarrassing comments posted under his name. Rather than deal with it maturely, this person has been attempting to stalk said poster and those who pointed out Kowalski wasn't doing himself any favors.
So if you see these comments posted as replies to clone, squiggleslash, GM Howell, Falconhell, Red Flayer, or Tom, now you know why they're appearing. And if you feel like joining in, making it clear to Mr Kowalski that spamming, sliming, and stalking are unacceptable, well, come on in, the water's lovely!